FreshDV Video: Canon Releases XL-H1s and XL-H1a

J

JOplinger

Member
we took a run over to the Canon booth in the south hall to speak with canon about their new XL-H1s and H1a model cameras.

http://www.freshdv.com/2008/04/nab-2008-canon.html

Canon's decided to stay with HDV Tape for "awhile", which seems odd with every other manufacturer providing at least some sort of tapeless solution. Does canon just not want to fork over the development $$ to create a solution?
 
They already have a solution, they already have functional AVC-HD cameras. Odd that they've decided to stick with HDV tape.
 
Mmmh, maybe they do have something to announce , but are waiting for the Scarlet, Epic, EX3 and HPX170 hypes to die down a bit? Ah, one can only hope! :-)
 
Canon has the best HDV implementation in the industry. Why would they drop something that works and works very well?
 
Exactly Robert.

Many people don't want to go tapeless. And AVC-HD is still inferior to HDV at this moment. So don't expect them to do anything soon. Although I can't imagine that the XL-H1(S) successor won't have options to go tapeless. I think it will either record to both tape and compact flash/pci express or only to compact flash/pci express.
 
Kholi said:
How is AVC-HD (at 24mbps) inferior to HDV?

Full raster 1080p, etc?

How's that work?
Click to expand...

Nobody said it is but he said at the moment and at the moment nothing shipping is 24mbs avchd. That's why the hmc150 in the fall is gonna be so interesting, even though I'm probably just gonna pick up a hpx170.
 
Then the comparison is moot, no? Until it exists how can you compare it to something else? S'like people comparing Scarlet and the HVX.

Pfft.
 
Still, now that timecode and audio are embedded into the XL-H1s HD-SDI port, it's perfectly setup to plug into something like the Convergent Designs' Flash XDR, which let's you record in all sorts of MPEG-2 (including a 160Mb/s 4:2:2 Intraframe mode) to low-cost CF cards.

And if you don't need HD-SDI, the XL-H1a offers you the rest of the camera for fewer $$$.
 
not everybody is ready for tapless solutions. I mean it speeds up workflow but the workflow isn't as simple as tape, especially in regards to archiving footage. Canon is playing it smart by sticking with the already proven XL form factor and already proven tape workflow. While every other company moves towards tapless they are gonna reap the benefits of the tape market. And for those who want the camera but want tapless can still purchase a firewire drive.
 
egproductions said:
not everybody is ready for tapless solutions. I mean it speeds up workflow but the workflow isn't as simple as tape, especially in regards to archiving footage. Canon is playing it smart by sticking with the already proven XL form factor and already proven tape workflow. While every other company moves towards tapless they are gonna reap the benefits of the tape market. And for those who want the camera but want tapless can still purchase a firewire drive.
Click to expand...

It's debatable how "proven" the XL line has been, from what I know the XL series hadn't been successful since the XL1s. The XL2 failed to out-compete the DVX and the XL-H1 is considered too overpriced for many shooters. I don't think tape is the issue here so much as features and pricing. Both these two new XL cams are still ridiculously overpriced for its feature set, especially when you considered that most of the "improvements" are just carry-over from the much more smartly priced XH-A1. It's pretty much just a cosmetic makeover.

I watched that FreshDV interview and there was so much BS coming from the Canon rep it was sad. Just listen to his response when he was asked whether the new cameras carry any improvements in term of image quality, S/N ratio or dynamic range. "Yes, absolutely! The improvement is that we give you MORE control options to get that better quality." Then he turns around and admits that the sensor block is identical to the H1. So much for improvement.

Least you think that I'm Canon bashing, I am an A1 owner and I love what they've done with the camera. I'm just very disappointed that Canon has a real opportunity to make a splash in the market, as they did with the introduction of the A1. But they've chosen to play it safe yet again.

egproductions said:
And for those who want the camera but want tapless can still purchase a firewire drive.
Click to expand...

There's many disadvantages to a firewire or other such devices. They're bulky; the firewire connections can slip out, and the deal breaker for me is that they're not solid state. The idea of a drive failing in the middle of a shoot is just terrifying.
 
Grug said:
And if you don't need HD-SDI, the XL-H1a offers you the rest of the camera for fewer $$$.
Click to expand...

That was a smart move for Canon. I think the lackluster sales of the G1 taught Canon that customers really wanted an H1 in that price range because of the lens options and not because they needed HD-SDI. Basically, A1 owners would've preferred an H1 without the jackpack rather than a G1 with HD-SDI.
 
Everyone acts like Canon is a huge mega-corporation like Sony and Panasonic. They're TINY compared to these companies. They have historically (since the Hi8 days) only sold a small fraction of what Sony and Pana sell. They don't have the budgets in their video departments to "lead" the industry. They have always "reacted" to the industry. They've always watched where the industry was leading and then developed a killer product.

Was the XL2 too little too late? Yes. HDV had already started taking off by that point. But they took what they learned on the XL2 and put it right into the H1 (which I still think should've been called the XL3). As far as I'm concerned they blew away the 1/3" chip cameras by producing the sharpest, highest resolution and most flexible camera in its class. Shoot, the HD-SDI options alone can add about $3K to the cost of the camera.

And if everyone thinks the H1 is over-priced have you checked out how much Sony plans on selling the EX-3 for? $14K for a camera the looks and performs nearly identically to the H1 and STILL uses GOP compression!!!! Hell, Sony removed the entire tape deck (which is another significant manufacturing cost of a camera) and is still charging a $4K premium for the EX3. I know it has 1/2" chips but the proof is in the pudding and I personally don't see that big of an improvement in picture quality.

I personally think Canon will watch and see how the market reacts to the EX1 and EX3 over the next year. Next year we will most likely see them produce a CMOS camera that uses AVC-HD recorded to some type of flash memory. If anyone is disappointed that camera didn't come to fruition today doesn't know the history of Canon or understand how/why they do what they do.
 
Just because the independent filmaker market favors the dvx over the XL2 doesn't mean the XL series hasen't proven itslef. Yes the XL series is slightly more expensive than the competition but people still buy it for the professional look, low noise and great glass canon offers. My point before was more about tape and how it is something people are comfortable with in terms of workflow. Imagine if the video industry started with solid state or purley digital recording and then tape came along. A solution where you can record your video digitally and archive it on the same $3 - $10 reliable peice of plastic! everybody would get onboard. I have over 100GB of digital photos. While I love ot just shoot and dump onto my computer, I now have no good way of storing them. DVD, HDs are fragile and go bad. When stored properly tapes are really the best option.
 
When stored properly, hard drive can also last you as long, and they're getting cheaper all the time. Granted that it's easier not to have to do the backup to drive thing, but I hate tape because it's not nearly full proof enough in the acquisition stage. Every once in a while there are dropped frames that ruined a good take, and it's completely random no matter how well you take care of the camera; if you happen to get a bad tape you're screwed. That's why I'm a fan of solid state media because you're less likely to encounter errors in the most critical part of the shoot: actually getting the footage. I can figure out how to archive it later.

And I agree that the EX3 is very expensive for being nearly the same as the EX1. But that's why the majority of people will buy the EX1 instead, which you would be hard pressed to argue is overpriced considering what you're getting. Same situation with Canon, people will go for the A1 instead of the H1 or H1s/H1a because they're getting the most bang for the buck. The pricing structure is still wrong.
 
I think the H1s without the HD-SDI option is a great camera option for folks trying to keep their camera budgets in check but really want a lot of great lens options. And if using 35mm adapters is something you're seriously considering, then the H1 and the JVC are really the only game in town.

(Side note: It seems absolutely horrid to me that folks are using a $30,000 cinema lens and sending down it down the tube of a built-in fixed lens that probably doesn't cost more than $800 to produce. You've got $30k of pristine light getting shoved into a $800 fixed lens. Oy.)
 
Robert Sanders said:
And if using 35mm adapters is something you're seriously considering, then the H1 and the JVC are really the only game in town.
Click to expand...

What do you mean? If anything, it's harder to rig a 35mm adapter on both of those cameras than any other because of their unwieldy ergonomics. If you're talking about relay adapters, there has not been a single manufacturer who had managed to bring to market a worthwhile unit. The LetusXL was the only one and it suffered from a crop factor and all the light loss and sharpness loss that came with that unit. I've heard that the Le brothers are working on the XL Extreme, but hadn't heard anything about that for a while. In short, XL and HD110 users are actually having a harder time using 35mm adapters on their rig, and if a relay does come out from Letus, they're still going to be severely limited in their choice of adapter.

I disagree that the XL line offers great lens option. It's really quite limited to about four or five lenses that Canon had developed, and most of those are optimized for SD cameras instead of HD. Since none of the lenses give you everything that you want, spending up to a third of the cost of your camera to get them all doesn't make sense if you're trying to keep costs down. In theory, the XL-EOS adapter will give you access to the still photography line, but all of those are so extremely telephoto that their application is severely limited. Interchangeable lense option only really starts to make sense at the 1/2'' or 2/3'' level where far more broadcast lenses are available.
 
Last edited:
Well, it's not unknown for my distaste for the 35mm adapter craze that took over the community. It was like a virus that spread like a wild fire. It was crazy. And on top of it everything look way too soft and bloomy. I can only assume the softness, blooming and inability to actually hit the focus mark and not buzz any shots was because all these adapters shoved onto the front of an already inferior fixed lens is the culprit.

The only 35mm adapter footage that looked even remotely acceptable was "The Signal" and some footage I saw from a project shot with the JVC. Even then some of the footage simply does not look tack sharp.

If you add the focal lengths provided between the 6x and 20x you have an amazing range. The 20x has a killer long end. The 6x is razor sharp at full wide. And the 16x manual lens for important rack shots, steadicam work and remote head operation is pretty amazing. Those are some pretty good options compared to throwing on ANOTHER piece of glass to a fixed lens just to get a wider FOV. It not even debatable.

Would I like more native XL lens options? Of course I would. I'd love a set of primes built natively for the H1. I'd love a set of manual zooms for the H1.

It'll be interesting to see what Sony does with the EX3 and their lens options. Will they be the same options that Canon offers? EF adapter? 2/3" adapter? Will there be any significant 1/2" lens options that don't cost more than $3K per lens like Canon offers or will optional lenses cost as much as JVC's ($10,000!!!)
 
I looked around and 1/2" XDCAM lenses from Fujinon range from $7300 to $12,600. Which, in my opinion, is too expensive for ownership. And this is why I like Canon. They at least offer some lens choices that are commensurate with the cost of the camera system itself. A 6x wide angle HD lens is only $2600. The 16x manual lens is ONLY $1100. Wow! Ask any Canon engineer and they'll tell you that the 16x manual lens is WAY over engineered for that price.

So if you need to get into 1/2" glass for the Sony system you're talking about a whole new ball game in terms of cost. That is unless Sony starts selling EX3 specific lenses. But let's not forget Sony's NOT a lens company like Canon is. They'll have to outsource their lenses to Fujinon or Zeiss or...wait for it...Canon. And I guarantee you they won't be as pricing aggressive as Canon is.

Ok. Enough schilling for Canon now. LOL
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top